Commonwealth v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 71 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Williams v. United States · Williams v. United States · Clisby v. Jones · Starr v. Al Lockhart · Baby "Richard", Etc. v. Kirchner, Otakar Doe, John, Et Ux., Etc. v. Kirchner, Otakar, Etc
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 75 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In those cases where a legitimate component of the defense to the charge of murder or the Commonwealth’s effort to obtain a sentence of death lies in demonstrating to the jury a claim concerning the defendant’s mental condition, expert psychiatric assistance may be indispensable. In such instances, I believe that it would be an abuse of discretion for the trial court to deny a request for funding, even though the request would not implicate federal constitutional due process concerns as interpreted by [Commonwealth v. Christy, 540 Pa. 192 , 656 A.2d 877 (1995) (plurality), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 872 , 116 S.Ct. 194 , 133 L.Ed.2d 130 (1995) ]. I would thus enforce as mandatory what the majority posits is permissive so that, as the trial court appropriately ensured in the present case, an indigent defendant is provided core resources necessary to present a full and fair defense in all phases of capital litigation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.